JammyJayBird...



  • @ainigmaris-thales I’m done replying to you. Cheers.



  • @jammyjaybird said in JammyJayBird...:

    @ainigmaris-thales I’m done replying to you. Cheers.

    Well, then… I think that means that I win.



  • @jak Agreed 100% on the food pyramid/big ag subsidies. It’s a perfect example of where fed govt and private interests have combined to push poor health upon the people. It’s a terrible state of affairs and we need to clean the stables on that. (Speaking as someone who eats paleo and cooks all his own food.)

    Re: health insurance, of course there’s abuse in welfare programs, just like in all human endeavors. If we wanted to put enough resources towards stopping those abuses, we definitely could. But we don’t. In fact, you’ve just described the classic example of the politician who defunds a program down to its bare bones, so it barely functions, and then points a finger and screams, “See, I told you that govt programs are broken!” In other nations, their governments are more committed to social safety net programs, and they generally work a hell of a lot better. It’s a question of national willpower.



  • @jammyjaybird Theft: 1. the act of stealing; the wrongful taking and carrying away of the personal goods or property of another; larceny.

    Feel free to be practical and sympathetic with your own money. When you advocate for the government to STEAL the fruits of my labor and give it to someone else, you are advocating theft by proxy. I don’t give a shit what other governments are doing, I don’t live abroad. If you like a particular system of government, move there. This is a Constitutional Republic based on the principles of individual rights and liberty. Because both your beloved Demoplicans and hated Republicrats make every effort to find a way to circumvent the Constitution when it doesn’t suit their purpose, they are equally treasonous. I have no problem with genuine charity where I am free to give or not as I see fit. Forcing me to be “charitable” at the point of gun violates my rights as an individual. The end does not justify the means.

    Would you dare to walk up to me in person, threaten me with physical violence by implication, and take a portion of my money out of my wallet? Then try to justify what even you must acknowledge as coercive armed robbery by telling me “I’m going only take half your money and it’s okay, because part of it will go to a sick child, part will go to an unwed mother, a little will go to a disabled veteran. The rest will go to a whole host government programs that you may not agree with, but that I believe are important and I’m smarter than you. So I know better how to spend the fruits of your labor.” Would you do this?

    I sincerely hope you realize that you do not have the right as an individual to do that. And further, that you understand that I do have the right to defend myself if you attempt such an aggressive act. Thou shalt not steal inverted translates to I, and only I, have the right to the fruits of my labor. Thou shalt not kill (i.e. commit murder) translates into I have a right to life and by extension the right to defend my life should you threaten me. Since you do not have the right to steal from me or threaten my life in your individual capacity, you do not have the authority to delegate that power to a government that ostensibly governs by the consent of the people for the people. I fear this is so simple that you and many others can’t see the truth of it.

    You have made it plain by what you have written that you are a collectivist who believes he knows better than the rest of us how the fruits of our labor should be distributed, the Supreme Law of the Land be damned. You are merely a useful tool to the collectivists in government. The labels right or left, Republicrat / Demoplican, socialist / mercantilist make no difference, the delusions of your ilk are being used to further their interests. If you genuinely want to change things, then advocate for individual rights, liberty and minimal government. The prosperity that follows will bring about charity. More of what you advocate, government intervention, regardless of affiliation will bring about tyranny, corruption, privation and death. Over 200 million victims of democide in the 20th century alone bear this out. You ignore history at your own peril.


  • administrators

    @boothe Wonderfully said, Boothe and all very true. The problem with ANY government program is that it always grows. Either the program itself, even if it is the tiniest program imaginable, will slowly grow in power and scope over time or programs will branch off of it to address issues the original program caused. We are left with a bureaucratic nightmare that is inefficient, ineffective, and a drain on taxpayers.

    I’m curious, how much of my taxpayer dollars actually make it through the federal system and actually make it to the hands of welfare recipients?
    90%?
    50%?
    2%?
    Regardless the number, you know where the rest goes? Into the hands of an entity that produces nothing, forcefully robs people on a national scale, and threatens them with prison if they refuse to comply.



  • @boothe When Obamacare was getting rammed through Congress I had a dipstick liberal twat tell me it was my “Christian duty” to help those in need. It may be my duty, but it’s on ME, not the feds. The government has no right to force me to pay for other people’s stuff. We have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Not a guarantee of happiness, the pursuit thereof.



  • @jak Your observation about government programs is quite accurate. They do indeed grow or even worse, metastasize like a cancer in the body politic. Years ago I had a relative who decided to go back to school after her kids graduated college and finish her master’s degree. She was determined to go to work for the dept. of social services and help the poor, unfortunate people in the city where she lived. I warned her that she would not be allowed to actually help anyone. What she would be required to do is assist people with paperwork to get them on the welfare roles. I explained that the budget, manning and space requirements for each office was determined by the number of “clients” they had. So her primary job as a social worker would be to enroll more clients.

    She told me I was being cynical and didn’t know what I was talking about. I had already discussed this with another relative who was a (very disillusioned) supervisor at another social services office. I also had a friend who was an attorney and had dealt with “the system” for years. He explained how things really worked to me in no uncertain terms. Between those things and a great deal of research, I really did know what I was talking about.

    Some time went by, she got her degree and was hired as a social worker. About six months later she quit. The next time I saw her, I asked why. She looked down and simply said “You were right.” The system is designed to keep these “poor” people (through free healthcare, WIC, housing assistance, energy assistance and “food stamps”) on the dole, too often for generations. As we can see, the number of welfare recipients had risen by 13 million during the Obama administration putting the number at 47 million by 2014 (or about a third more than when he was sworn in). As of 2015 the US Census bureau disclosed that approximately 52.2 million Americans were “participating in government assistance programs.” That was approximately 21.3% of the population or over 1 in 5 people!

    According to the statisticbrain website that number, as of 2016, had reached 67.9 million people not including the 70.5 million on Medicaid! Never mind that we already spend annually, and un-Constitutionally I might add, $158.2 billion on welfare programs not including food stamps (SNAP) or unemployment. I suppose this is what Jammy considers a miserly system where we leave starving waifs on the street to pick through garbage and fend for themselves while their ailing parents lay dying on the hall floors of the hospitals. I guess he’ll be happy when the ratio reaches one person on the dole for every person working? No, probably not.

    Many of our poor here are not only fat but morbidly obese. Contrast them with the actual poor in the streets of New Dehli for a reality check. Not only that but the majority of them have cell phones! Many have cars! That ain’t poor. Young women right here in Midwest small town USA will approach you and ask if you want to buy some groceries for fifty cents on the dollar. The way it works is you take her to the grocery store, pick out what you want and she pays for it with her SNAP card. When you get back to your car, you take the groceries and give her half the total on the receipt in cash. She gets meth, beer and weed money. I kid you not.

    We haven’t even touched on the number of people on SSDI (“disability”) that are perfectly able to work and choose not too. Why should they? It’s all free, right? This is the true face of collectivism and what Jammy apparently wants more of…



  • @boothe I saw this abuse every day in the ER. People treat it like their primary doctor. We even had patients answer with one of the ER doctors when you would ask who their regular doctor was. I see them in the grocery store with two cart loaded down with groceries, including steak and seafood, while we’re using coupons and buying off brand. Infuriates me. A lot of couples live together, are married in everything but name, but refuse marriage because they will lose their benefits. Kids pressured into not doing well at school because then they will lose their classification as “mentally ill” and parents will lose their check. An old lady kept bedridden and the family wants everything done for her medically even though the merciful thing to do would be to let her go, all because they like spending her check on HDTVs.

    But we need more of this, please.


  • administrators

    @jumpnjive Indeed. Charity ceases being such when you’re FORCED to give your money away. 2 Corinthians 9:7 says to give with a joyful heart. The underlying tone is to give willingly and freely, not because you have to by the federal govt.



  • @jak All while the people who pass Obamacare made sure they didn;t have to participate. The hypocrisy is staggering



  • @jumpnjive That is absolutely right. This whole “Social Justice Warrior” front is an attempt to commit institutionalized fraud and conversion against those of us who are productive. Somehow these people think that if they bitch and moan loud enough, break enough shite and hurt enough people, everything will just be handed to them because muh race or gender or God only knows what. I have news for them, I’m not giving them shit if I can help it! They need to understand that life is hard And especially so if you won’t get up off your ass and work. The only thing we’re entitled to in this world are those things we’ve made with our own hands, earned or that have been freely given to us. I don’t give a rat’s ass how wealthy the nation is, what happened to your ancestors or if you feel disenfranchised for some reason. All I care about (as long as you are of sound mind and able bodied, there are genuine charity cases) is what you are doing that is productive to support yourself. The Biblical principle is this: If a man will not work, don’t let him eat. He or she will find something productive to do within about 24 hours in most cases.



  • @jumpnjive My wife saw similar things before she left nursing. One occasion that still chaps my hide was this: A young man from the inner city was sitting on his front porch, minding his own “business” (selling crack rock) when some of his “associates” from another “company” drove by and blew the back of his calf off with a hollow point. When he arrived at the ER he had several thousand dollars in cash on him along with quite a bit of bling. They cataloged it and put it in a safe for him.

    The older ER doctor was going to stump that leg off at the knee and send him home. But the younger, more progressive doctor decided they could save his leg. He underwent several surgeries, spent weeks on the rehab unit hitting the morphine pump as often as possible. The cost was in the tens of thousands of dollars. He conferred with his “business associates” regularly behind closed doors and when they left, the room “smelled funny” according to my wife. Uh-huh.

    When one of the nurses inquired about his “profession” in my wife’s presence he stated “I poe’s concrete at night” and laughed. When he was finally released, they gave him his money and jewelry back. He never paid a dime. The following year the nurses didn’t get a raise. I wonder why not…



  • @boothe The reason that “healthcare” is as expensive as it is right now is because of all the government intervention. You can accurately track the rise in healthcare costs with the increase in government intervention. Even more telling, the fact that everyone has gotten used to getting their healthcare insurance from their employer rather than buying it themselves is because of government intervention.

    Having your healthcare premium come out of your salary before it even gets to you, and having your healthcare bills negotiated and paid by your insurance company without you having any control over it – that means you don’t ever deal with the costs first hand. You can’t really shop for a cheaper doctor, or spend more of your own money to get a better doctor, or make a deal with a doctor or clinic that you will bring your whole family there for a reduced rate, or use any of the usual free market tactics that people use to save themselves money or get more of what they actually want.

    The skyrocketing costs of healthcare and health insurance are not going to be solved by more government intervention, they will only be made worse. Much worse. Obamacare is a primary example.

    And I don’t care if its Republican intervention or Democrat intervention. They are all the same. The truth is, all of them are bought and paid for by special interests. The congressmen have no idea what is in any of these bills that they pass… they just push the bills that their big donors and lobbyist tell them to push.



  • @ainigmaris-thales That sir is the truth. American “healthcare” is a web of corporate cartels designed to keep people sick and paying in to the system. I am old enough to remember having a family doctor in private practice. We knew him personally. He charged $20 for an office visit which was the going rate in Tidewater, Virginia at that time. I broke my arm when I was twelve and the whole thing, x-rays, cast, follow up visits didn’t even total $150. Granted, that was 1971 but even adjusted for inflation that does not equate to the price of an office visit now. The last time I went to the doctor was a year ago. The basic office visit was $250 excluding tests. If we go by the Minneapolis Fed’s inflation calculator it should have cost $121. If anything with modern technology it should be even cheaper, since efficiency and productivity are higher now.

    But it’s not cheaper because as you so astutely point out, there is no free market competition forcing them to compete by both improving quality and lowering prices. Add that to the fact that when an “indigent” person comes in, they have to treat that patient and someone is going to pay for it. The healthcare provider isn’t going to just “eat” the cost, they are going to spread it out over everyone else’s bills. And that includes costs incurred by those who have insurance, PPOs, HMOs, Medicare and Medicaid or any plan that has negotiated a lower rate. Sure, they pay out, but not enough to satisfy the stockholders. So that will be passed on the rest of us in higher copays and out-of-pocket expenses.

    As more mergers and acquisitions occur, such as CVS acquiring Aetna, the industry leaders will become bigger and more powerful allowing them to consolidate their stranglehold on the regulatory agencies and legislators. The corruption will increase as costs climb and quality of care goes down. The major corporate players were the ones driving the Affordable Care Act. This wasn’t done out of compassion for the poor as Jammy views it from his delusional worldview. The ACA was put there to increase market share for the insurance companies. It is a veritable government gun to our heads forcing us to buy a product, in this case health insurance, whether we want it or not. And putting those of us who are healthy on the hook to pay for others who all too often are unhealthy due to poor lifestyle choices.

    As you point out it’s government intervention that is to blame. Whether it’s Team A or Team B, we’re still getting gang banged. And the healthcare cartels laugh about it all the way to the bank. Doing away with the individual mandate is an overall good thing because it lessens government involvement. We need to get government completely out of healthcare and let the free market chips fall where they may. Otherwise we will end up like Canada. Except there won’t be anyone south of our border with state of the art equipment and facilities to send our sick and dying to treatment like they do.



  • @boothe Lol your position is quite clear. And you didn’t need to write a screed to explain yourself. You’re a classic small-government Republican. I’ve known, and debated, hundreds of people like yourself.

    It’s clear that you don’t want to be forced to participate in medical insurance. The problem is that, financially, a national insurance program doesn’t work UNLESS everybody participates in it. This was the conclusion that the Republican Heritage Foundation arrived at in the late nineties, when it promoted the individual mandate. (Yes, a Republican group.) This was the case that was made by Mitt Romney, who implemented it in the state of Massachusetts. (Another Republican.) He got the idea from Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House. (Another Republican.)

    Your solution – to let the private sector work its so-called magic – shows zero understanding of the history of health insurance in this country.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_health_care_reform_in_the_United_States

    This is my last response to health insurance debate, because we’re going in circles here, and you all know your minds, and I definitely know mine. Let me just end by saying that my position is motivated by practical sympathy – how do we provide a better life for the greatest number of citizens? Thomas Malthus asked this same question two hundred years ago. Your position, however, is motivated by political ideology – how can I keep all government out of my life as much as possible?

    My position seeks to preserve as much human life as possible. That should be especially doable in the wealthiest nation in the history of the world.

    Your position, however, seeks to preserve only your own life, particularly the health of your wallet.

    Another problem is that your small-govt political position often ignores the fact that very often the villains are the private sector. This is particularly true in the case of for-profit medical insurance companies. I know that you don’t want to discuss that, because it’s the Achilles heel in all conservative arguments. But it is true nonetheless.

    Anyways, have a Merry Christmas, and try to remember the 2 million unfortunate poor children who lose their health insurance in January as a result of your political ideology. (CHIP loses its funding on January 19, thanks to Republican-led Congress.) You probably won’t remember them, because your own children are the only ones that matter.

    https://ccf.georgetown.edu/2017/12/20/new-report-on-chip-funding-delay-shows-2-million-kids-may-lose-coverage-in-january/


  • administrators

    @jammyjaybird That is another straw man argument with some ad hominem mixed in. Our country was so strong fur such a long time because we believed in self reliance.
    Also, almost all companies, even health insurance companies are for profit. With the enormous risks insurance companies take on, it’d be foolish to be a nonprofit and you’d see health insurance companies going out of business much more often.
    A more reasonable approach to dropping both health insurance and healthcare costs without infringing on the freedoms of its citizens would be to allow companies to compete over state lines, enact tort reforms so doctors aren’t having to hire lawyers for every frivolous lawsuit, and to also allow insurance companies to sell different types of insurances instead of making them cover certain things that particular groups don’t need, like maternity care packaged into deals for single men that they can’t opt out of.



  • @jammyjaybird You are literally the only person in this thread that cares about the whole “Democrat” and “Republican” labels thing. You are desperate to make it about D vs R. No one else cares at all. You are the only ones who keep tingtbing that up, except those of us pointing that your D vs R shtick is meaningless. It’s pretty clear that’s all that is really important to you, just scoring some political points for your team against the other team. Well no one else here is playing that game.



  • @jammyjaybird Actually Jammy I am not a Republicrat or a Demoplican. I have explained this before. You are attempting to label, discredit and dehumanize me so you can feel better about advocating for stealing from me and our other productive fellow countrymen in the name of “practical sympathy”. I am in fact what was once known as a Classical Liberal. I understand that maximum human happiness and prosperity comes with maximum individual liberty. Holding me in bondage by forcing me to hand over a portion of the proceeds of engaging in a common occupation by right, which is what a direct wage tax is, takes away my happiness and prosperity. That sir is a direct violation of my Creator endowed rights. Further it is a violation of the Constitutional prohibition on involuntary servitude. All of your “progressive” side’s circular logic, straw-men, ad hominem, obfuscation and sophistry notwithstanding.

    The most important thing your Wikipedia reference blatantly omits is how the current system of health insurance came about. In the 1930s due to wage and price controls, employers were having a hard time attracting the skills and talent they needed from their competitors. Since they weren’t allowed to compete with higher wages, they offered other benefits such as paid health insurance, sick leave, vacation and pensions. It was government screwing around with the free market that caused private enterprise to find a way around these artificial stumbling blocks. These things became thoroughly entrenched as “entitlements” in the American psyche because of government policies and now people like you think everyone should have them, regardless of their ability to pay for them.

    And spare me the bleeding heart bullshit about saving lives. Your wing of that large predatory bird we call government has done a remarkably good job of snuffing the lives of countless humans, both born and unborn, in the past few decades alone. Not that the so-called “right wing” hasn’t (there’s plenty of blame to be placed on both “sides”). Your camp touts the virtues of abortion on demand, which is no less the murder of children than the practice of Moloch. And it is done for the same reason: to secure the future prosperity of the parent(s). How do you square that with your “practical sympathy”? The so-called “right wing” (i.e. neo-con war-mongers) prefer to wait until the children are born and then lob cruise missiles at them or snuff them with drone strikes. It’s okay though, because those aren’t “our” children. Our children are provided with weapons and allowed to traipse off to foreign lands where they can attempt to directly kill foreigners who have done nothing to us. They do stand a good chance of being maimed and dying at the hands of those same foreigners who rightfully and forcefully object to the presence of imperial invadors, but that’s a sacrifice the military / industrial complex is willing to make.

    Thales is right. You are, as far as I can tell, the only one here who is still a “true believer” in the false dichotomy of D vs. R. The “elite” on both sides of the aisle send their children to the same private schools (with armed guards), belong to the same private clubs and secret societies, eat at the same restaurants and rub shoulders in the same cloak rooms. And the key thing almost all of them share is that they do nothing productive and require a never ending stream of our stolen wealth to support them. I find it disheartening that someone who seems as intelligent as you can’t see through this. But hey, enjoy your delusion, as you blindly stumble along advocating that government do more, with more of our money to strip us of more of our rights. The whole time they are fleecing us they are laughing at people like you who support them, all the way to the bank.

    Your position is like the old time snake oil salesman. When we’ve had grandma on snake oil for a long time and she doesn’t get better the solution is to give her more snake oil. Then when grandma dies, your position is she just didn’t get enough snake oil. It never seems to cross your mind that (a) the snake oil itself may be toxic, and (b) that there are viable alternative treatments. There are only two ways to approach these perceived public problems in your world-view: your way and the wrong way. You still fail to directly address my most basic position: that direct taxation is theft and giving (part of) the loot to people who didn’t earn it is conversion. In your mind you are right, we are wrong and no one is going to confuse you with the facts. Confirmation bias, thy name is @jammyjaybird.



  • @jammyjaybird With respect to CHIP funding, if you and your camp feel so strongly about what “may” happen (did you read the article or just cite it?), feel free to put your money where your mouth is. Go out and buy health insurance for one or more these poor unfortunates as an example for the rest us. I’m sure that if you get together with all your collectivist friends and pitch in you can take care of this shortfall and feel really good about yourselves at the same time. You could even do it through crowd funding and possibly come up with more money than the gun-vermin can since they won’t be skimming off the top. Go on. No one’s stopping you. Or would that solution prove just how much your camp really cares about “the children”? I will say that your ilk are very generous…with other people’s money, lol.



  • @ainigmaris-thales They’re animals anyway, let them lose their souls


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to A Kings Castle was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.